ASADA case against Essendon players rests on injection regime

ASADA's case against 34 past and present Essendon players rests heavily on evidence that points to a perfect match between the injection regime at the AFL club in 2012 and the protocol for administering the banned drug, thymosin beta 4.

The players have provided written documentation that they used four drugs, with one being "thymosin", the supplement biochemist Shane "Dr Ageless" Charter says was used at the club.

Should players come forward within the next few days, volunteer guilt and provide solid evidence, it is expected ASADA will recommend they receive sanctions of less than six months under the substantial assistance provision.

The players have also signed documentation of the number of injections they received per week throughout the season, which has been described as "an exact recipe for thymosin beta 4".

According to sports science sources, the standard protocol for the banned synthetic peptide is one injection each weekday for 10 weeks, compared with the injection regime for the natural substance, thymomodulin, which is one injection per week for six weeks. That is, 50 injections of the prohibited substance compared with six of the non-banned supplement in just over half the time. ASADA will argue that the batches of the supplement received by the club from the compounding pharmacist, Nima Alavi, is a match with the usage of the banned thymosin beta 4. It will be alleged multiple doses of the prohibited peptide, made to order, were received by the club in a regime that lasted over many months.

While the evidence is circumstantial, ASADA will argue it satisfies the "comfortable satisfaction" criterion the AFL tribunal must have to reach a guilty verdict.

Sports scientist Stephen Dank, the architect of Essendon's supplements program, accepts that there are considerable differences between the protocols associated with the injection regime of the two varieties of "thymosin" but would likely argue the evidence is fabricated.

Advertisement

Alavi has already accused Dank of forging his signature, while lawyers for the players may question the testimony of Charter, who was sentenced to four years' jail for the importation in 2004 of drugs. The hearing may also reveal some players had more knowledge of the drugs regime than others, where some may have seen evidence of thymosin beta 4.

Two players have their own legal representation, breaking from the 32 represented by the AFL Players Association.

Should players come forward within the next few days, volunteer guilt and provide solid evidence, it is expected ASADA will recommend they receive sanctions of less than six months under the substantial assistance provision.

However, the offer of six-month bans made to Essendon and the AFL in June, before the club and coach James Hird took action in the Federal Court, will not be revived by ASADA.

The original six months offer would have meant the suspension beginning after Essendon's last game in 2014 but the later start to the 2015 season, owing to the Cricket World Cup, may have meant they missed no matches.

But now, should the AFL tribunal find the players guilty of taking prohibited substances, it is likely ASADA will appeal any sentence that is not greater than six months.

While some of this sanction can be backdated, as it was in the case of 12 NRL players who represented Cronulla in 2011, it would result in AFL matches missed in 2015. WADA rules require sports' doping tribunals to hand down bans in number of months, not matches.

While the AFL has positioned itself as a disinterested party in the ASADA-Essendon dispute, surely it has everything to gain by having the players' bans minimised.

Similarly, the haste shown by the AFL Players Association in seeking to have the case go directly to the AFL tribunal, bypassing the anti-doping rule violation panel (ADRVP), is seen as a tactic to have a three-month suspension served in the off season.

To be fair, it is rare for the panel to overturn an ASADA action and order a case not to proceed, thus suggesting the body is redundant.

However, the players' association's demand for a quick hearing is perceived to be more about minimising the number of games missed in 2015. The fact it has not contacted ASADA directly is a further source of aggravation.

ASADA did fast-track the Cronulla case but did so via the ADRVP.

Furthermore, ASADA has already demonstrated resolve to have the case concluded. It could have waited until after the outcome of Hird's appeal to the Full Federal Court, before re-issuing show-cause notices, thereby pushing the saga, now known as "asaga", deep into 2015.